Jacoby.

(Parenthetically, now)

And on that page, this fun sidebar:

Top 10 Trending Articles / Most Viewed

Macron erupts on world stage with Trump snub, rapport with Canadian leader

It's so absurd that it essentially ties in with this very blog post: The common arrangements of civilization have been so sturdy that they've become transparent.

I couldn't do those men's jobs.

I was friends with the late Ted Churchill, the first guy to get the Steadicam from the guy who designed it, Garrett Brown. When I was 20 or 21, I thought, "I could become a Steadicam cameraperson!" Yes, what was I smoking?

Ted put the thing on me and I could barely remain standing, then he took it off and we went out for lunch.

Another interesting part of The Narrative is what is left out of the reporting in most stories. Julia Reinstein, a reporter for BuzzFeed, tracked down the FaceBook page for the perp, Jeremy Joseph Christian. He was a Bernie Sanders supporter, and, expressed admiration for Jill Stein. Apparently, he detested both Hillary and The Donald. Still, Dr. Stein, has been tweeting that this is another example of violence in the age of Trump, and while news stories play up the White Supremist angle on the perp, they omit his socialist ideology, and who he supported.

Scary. A friend pointed out that there has been a lot of knife attacks recently in Portland Oregon. Googling confirms. I guess it is true...if gun control goes far enough people will find other means.

And if I read it correctly there has been some dude going around throwing semen on people.

I think I will skip Portland.

And if I read it correctly there has been some dude going around throwing semen on people.

That's such a weird one on many levels ...

How does one "throw" semen? It's likely a small amount and pretty watery — a "semen wiper" would make more sense.

Did he do it surreptitiously, or was it intended to provoke a shocked reaciton, like a flasher wants? Where does this pathology begin? Did he see semen on a piece of clothing and get turned on? Are there semen-throwing fetish websites?

I'm sure having semen flicked on one could put a crimp in an otherwise pleasant shopping day, but as far as gross public fetishes go, this one pales next to something like serial foot stompers, who actually hurt women. No one wants unasked-for semen on their clothes, but it beats having to visit the podiatrist.

I think this was unnecessary and sad. The asshole was yelling at the girls, not hitting them. The two men could have just escorted the girls to safety, without engaging the asshole. They could have all gotten off the train.

Kate I think that these guys walked into an inevitably violent confrontation that they weren't ready for.

The assailant has a long history of violent criminal behavior, and is known in Portland for a series of extreme and provocative public incidents. He's probably insane. Its surprising that he wasn't in prison.

He'd apparently started acting up as soon as he got on the train and was walking through the car shirtless, behaving erratically. He set on the girls as soon as they got on and sat down.

Honestly the mistake that it seems these guys made was to have confronted him w/o being prepared for him to react violently.

He was able to slash the throats of all three of them with a relatively small knife. That's not an easy thing to do if someone is trying to defend themselves, much less while fighting multiple people. It's not apparent that any of them gave much resistance.

I suspect that when he attacked them they were taken by surprise, and then killed as they tried to get away.

"I suspect that when he attacked them they were taken by surprise, and then killed as they tried to get away."

Just as you should always act as if a gun is loaded and never point it at someone you are unwilling to shoot, likewise you should never engage in a physical altercation with some one you are willing to beat to death with your bare hands.

I dont get into fights often, and I never start them, but I've won every fight I've been in because I dont fight to win, or get the other guy to back off. If backed into a fight I fight with the assumption I could get killed and fight with the intention of killing that motherfucker first.

The son of a friend of mine was killed confronting someone who was mentally ill.

It is a really bad idea unless you are in danger yourself, or have the means at hand to defend both yourself, and the third party actually being threatened. ( Yelling at someone is just annoying.)

This was a naive failure to read the situation, and get the hell out of Dodge.

Ah, Portland.

I wonder if they would have stood up for the women if they were wearing MAGA hats and the berserk maniac was a local pro-Hillary hipster type.

Portland has become like an open air asylum.

There have been several violent incidents like this recently, in which someone with a severe mental illness has assaulted people in public. All of them have been known to be a danger to the community.

What's kind of ridiculous about this situation is that everyone's trying to claims that they died standing up to 'hate', and that 'hate' was responsible for their deaths.

In truth they died because they naively confronted a man who the Portland police and mental health establishment knew to be a danger to the community, who should have had in custody long ago.

Read up on the attackers background and history of behavior and ask yourself how on earth anyone could have let him continue to terrorize the community.

Op-ed: "Too little, too late from Trump on Portland killings"

https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2017/05/30/too-little-too-late-from-trump-portland-killings/aYdyX06toF0IK55OIRMcIP/story.html

She points out that in all likelihood, Trump didn't even write the tweet - which came three days later!

A writer on The Good Men Project some years ago recounted stopping at an accident with her husband. The thing was just getting taken care of by earlier passersby and her husband said he was glad, since he didn't want to go into a burning car.
His wife--the writer--said he didn't have to.
No, he said, you don't understand.
Women may. Men must.
If you look at the Texas floods and rescues, it's always men edging into the torrent, rope around their waist, or in some other way taking the risk.
Had there been only women on scene and none of them ventured, nobody would reproach them. The same is not true for men.
Regarding the Portland situation: These guys were not prepared. They were not armed, not trained, and--speculation; they had been so portlandized that they figured talk would work--when trying to thwart a violent nutcase from his desired actions. It is, as a commenter said, hard to kill someone with a knife if competent first aid is available, since the issue is bleeding out. To be able to actually kill two and critically wound a third means they were sitting ducks. They did themselves no favors by being so vulnerable. I've never been to Portland, but it seems as if being vulnerable gets you Portland Points. Okay, but there's always a possibility they won't be enough. So good on them for trying, but they cost themselves and their families by not having the tools to support their hearts.

Um, at least one victim was a veteran, right? I call that being trained.